Thread: Black holes, dark matter & dark energy

DARK energy and dark matter, two of the greatest mysteries confronting physicists, may be two sides of the same coin. A new and as yet undiscovered kind of star could explain both phenomena and, in turn, remove black holes from the lexicon of cosmology.

Full article: http://www.newscientist.com/article....mg18925423.600

They suggest that the universe is like a giant dark energy star, which would explain its expansion as the anti-gravity effect of the vacum energy created inside this star's shell...

They also think that black holes behave just like dark matter stars, what means that we could be mistaken about some black holes...

Oh, thank god for that. Something that simultaneously deals with the problematic infinite densities of singularities, and also with the nonsensical stuff that came out about a month ago about dark matter coming in 20 light year chunks.

With this idea in mind, they - along with Emil Mottola at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, Pawel Mazur of the University of South Carolina in Columbia and colleagues - analysed the collapse of massive stars in a way that did not allow any violation of quantum mechanics. Sure enough, in place of black holes their analysis predicts a phase transition that creates a thin quantum critical shell. The size of this shell is determined by the star's mass and, crucially, does not contain a space-time singularity. Instead, the shell contains a vacuum, just like the energy-containing vacuum of free space. As the star's mass collapses through the shell, it is converted to energy that contributes to the energy of the vacuum.

Seriously, this is great news. No singularity and an explanation for anti-Energy. Science exploration doens't get any better than this.

To soon to start celebrating yet. We need to wait until the rest of the physics community look over their work. But it promises all sorts of breakthroughs if it is true.

I've never believed in black holes or the Big Bang. This is based upon my knowledge of humans, not on my knowledge of physics.

I hope they actually fill in the "black holes" in the theory... hehehehehe...hehehe....hehe....he...eeeehhhh....

(sorry about the bad joke)

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

I've never believed in black holes or the Big Bang. This is based upon my knowledge of humans, not on my knowledge of physics.

me too

Welcome to the forum Fieldz. You realise that our common disbelief of the Big Bang probably just means we are both wrong. :wink:

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

You realise that our common disbelief of the Big Bang probably just means we are both wrong. :wink:

I don't think so

Originally Posted by new scientist article

Another problem is that light from an object falling into a black hole is stretched so dramatically by the immense gravity there that observers outside will see time freeze: the object will appear to sit at the event horizon for ever. This freezing of time also violates quantum mechanics. "People have been vaguely uncomfortable about these problems for a while, but they figured they'd get solved someday," says Chapline. "But that hasn't happened and I'm sure when historians look back, they'll wonder why people didn't question these contradictions."

This seriously makes me question the believablity of the whole article, because there is no contradiction or paradox in this effect. This is a purely optical effect and the object would actually redshift and fade from view (as the photons reaching you from the object quickly become less frequent) at the same time. The actual event (during which you would supposedly see such slowing down) occurs so fast that all you are really going to see is the object vanish. So what descriptions like the one above about the object "frozen on in time" at the edge of the black hole, really means, is that it is theoretically still possible after thousands of years to detect a photon arriving from that object before entering the black hole, just because it may take some photons that long to escape from the gravity of the black hole.

The gravitational time dilation has the opposite of this optical effect. Gravitational time dilation will only exacerbate the time dilation likely to be experienced due to velocity. It is extremely difficult to enter a black hole slowly (by which I mean at non-relativistic speeds). What the time dilation means is that the clocks on an object approaching the black hole will slow down according to a distant observer. This does not mean that the object will slow down. Instead it means that the person on the object with the clock will experience an even shorter ride than the already extremely short ride he could expect otherwise (without the time dilation). Just as a person traveling to another star at relatistic speeds experiences a shorter trip than the people watching from earth.

I have done simulations of trying to oribit a black hole or pass near a black hole and the everything happens so quickly that I have to have the simulation automatically slow down the time scale by a factor of millions in order to see anything at all. And that is even without the gravitational time dilation which will make it worse. Part of the difficulty is that these objects are so small. One with the mass of our sun would be only 6 kilometers across. Although there are bigger black holes, the bigger ones would be no easier to see than the small ones because proportionately higher gravity. If you are close enough to a black hole there is most definitely something to see because of the distortion of light around it, including a second image of everything in the sky in a ring around the black hole (called an Einstein ring). Actually there are an infinite number of such images in concentric rings but the others are too small to see with your eye. BUT if you are close enough to see anything like this, you don't really have any time to see anything at all.

I agree, Black holes are far different from Dark matter but check out this DARK MATTER link: (links removed)-- OR if you want to read it in Adobe then click the following link:(links removed)

Danfitz, we discourage resurrecting old threads and forbid spamming; you are doing both. Consider this a formal warning.

It took me a while to accept that dark matter and dark energy exist.